UK Report Blames The Internet For Terrorism, Says ISPs Should Take Down Content

from the can't-even-understand-the-role-of-an-isp-then? dept

It appears that technologically clueless, reactionary politicians blaming the internet for terrorism and demanding ways to censor content are not just limited to US Senators named Lieberman. Nope, it appears that some elected officials over in the UK have similarly allergic reactions to the internet. The Home Affairs Committee in the UK Parliament has released this fear mongering report about how the internet is somehow radicalizing the youth into being terrorists, and how ISPs need to pull down content.

All of these reports seem to assume that because some kids used the internet to learn about terrorism, that it's the internet's fault they became terrorists. There's no thought to the idea that these disenfranchised kids were likely to seek out whatever way they could to join a terrorism organization. That would involve actually understanding the root causes of terrorism, though, and it's much, much easier to just point a finger and blame the internet. Of course, since it appears these luddites don't understand the internet at all, it's no surprise that they confused ISPs with hosting companies -- and demanded that the ISPs "take down" content, when the only thing they really could do would be to block content. Hosting companies would be able to remove it. David Meyer, the ZDnet UK reporter who wrote the story linked above, asked a spokesperson for the committee to explain this rather glaring error, and the person "was unable to explain." That should tell you just about everything you need to know about this report, and it should be laughed out of any further discussion should it ever be brought up again.

Re:

Before the internet, it was incredibly hard to communicate around the world. Many child pornographers would have been isolated, with no way to "hook up" with others that have similar interests.

The internet makes it so that the single pervert in each town or city can become friends with the other lonely perverts out there, which gives them a sense of community, training in how to hide their activities, and sources for new materal - as well as encouragement to go out and do more.

This is one of those areas where the effects of the internet are clear and very negative.

Re: Re:

"Before the internet, it was incredibly hard to communicate around the world. Many child pornographers would have been isolated, with no way to "hook up" with others that have similar interests."

But not impossible. Child porn most definitely existed before the internet, and the lack of media hype meant that it often went unnoticed.

Also, the same argument as above could be made about connecting people with purely decent interests (e.g. Linux was made possible by the internet, as have a huge number of educational resources).

"This is one of those areas where the effects of the internet are clear and very negative."

Only if you take one side of the argument.

The flipside, of course, is that it also makes it easier for these people to be tracked. If ordinary people anywhere in the world can access these images, then so can law enforcement. If used correctly, they can not only catch the people ultimately responsible for child porn, but also gather intelligence to enable future gangs to be caught more easily. It can be used as a fantastic tool to monitor and catch criminals, and even set up honeypot and other traps to catch would-be paedophiles before they can abuse a single child.

It's not cut and dried, but the argument is there that the internet has helped catch as many of these people as it has allowed to do evil things. The internet is ultimately a benign tool - what it allows ultimately isn't anything new, although the scale and accessibility might be.

Re: Re: Blanks Law

So, Godwin's Law covers Nazi references, what's the one for child porn?

In any case, I'm going to repeat your statement replacing a couple words:Before the internet, it was incredibly hard to communicate around the world. Many researchers would have been isolated, with no way to "hook up" with others that have similar interests.

The internet makes it so that the single researcher in each town or city can become friends with the other lonely researchers out there, which gives them a sense of community, training in how to enhance their activities, and sources for new (sic)materal - as well as encouragement to go out and do more.

This is one of those areas where the effects of the internet are clear and very positive.FTFY
Of course, there's lots of things you could put in there for a positive example. I challenge you to come up with 5 legitimate (affects more than 5% of the global populace) negative effects.

Re: Re: Re: Blanks Law

Before the internet, it was incredibly hard to communicate around the world. Many researchers would have been isolated, with no way to "hook up" with others that have similar interests

Not entirely true, there were printed media in which researchers would discuss their work. They could even ring one another if they wanted to.

The Internet has made it much easier for people to contact one another in a manner that cannot be regulated and is largely 'unseen'. It differs from 'traditional media' in that don't even need to know who you are talking to or even how to contact them.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Blanks Law

"there were printed media in which researchers would discuss their work. They could even ring one another if they wanted to."

And, of course, this was true for pedophiles as well.

The internet is a communications tool. It is fundamentally no different than the phone system, mail system, telegraph, radio, or even the highway & train systems in this way. All of those things can and are used for anonymous communications as well.

Criminals use all communications tools. Always have and always will. To single out the internet as particularly pernicious is just wrong.

If you are saying that the internet is bad because it lets people talk more easily, then I think you have a bigger beef with society at large than the internet in particular.

Re: Re:

When you think about Internet empowering perverts you should really think what do you prefer:
1) Pedophiles running on the streets hunting our kids
or
2) Pedophiles browsing images on their computer screens

I think any rational person would prefer option 2...
There is a lot of research showing that availability of porn on the Internet reduce actual rapes: This one for example: http://www.toddkendall.net/internetcrime.pdf
So in my opinion your conclusion:
"This is one of those areas where the effects of the internet are clear and very negative" is really unproven.

Isn't that just a shock. Those in power are realizing that the general population is becoming unsettled. That leads to their cushy government jobs being threatened. So they do the only thing they know how to do. They lash out cluelessly trying to silence and suppress people instead of asking why they are upset to begin with.

We have already won Poland where over 40,000 people marched where the Government has now said ACTA will not be ratified and they will seek to stop ACTA in the European Parliament. Now we need to convince other countries to do the same.

Re: Parallels

Back then, the transit times of books and news was extremely long, information spread at a very slow rate. Now we live in a time when information and news spreads at an unbelievable rate. Centuries ago for like minded individuals to come together, for a conspiracies to form, or for people to come to a consensus, it took years. Now you do not need to wait six months for a letter to reach you. It doesn't take 3 months to travel to conference to meet face to face.

Due to modern communications, we are seeing an acceleration of consensus, and a shortening of the time it takes for systems to be attacked for being corrupt or overbearing. This trend is accelerating at an amazing rate.

typical UK. haven't got a fucking clue! what the governments dont like is that the internet is the best way of organizing people. fine when it's to try to overthrow what is deemed a dictatorship, not so fine when yours is the government about to be overthrown!

Blame. Target. Get reelected.

With politicians it is always some "evil doers" or something bad that they must fight against. They need "crises" to do three things. Show the voters that they are working for them and to then use that as a "see the good I did" so reelect me platform.

The third is the opposite of what Descartes said "A state is better governed which has few laws, and those laws strictly observed.". They have to make laws or they will lose their power.

Labeled

If you are against the status quo then you are a radical and a terrorist in these dopes eyes. The disgusting display of corruption in the crony capitalist government, that the internet has helped bring to light with widespread reach, is what causes radicalism. The internet is "Power to the People!"

It's these types of reactions

This make me glad that in Canada (I don't know the status in other countries) George Orwell's book, 1984, is in the public domain. The way things are going, this book should be required reading material, with a follow-up report, for a politician. Each and every time they are elected.

This would serve a dual-purpose. First off, they would hopefully wise up to the follies of such attempts by the government to control the freedoms of the people, and make them learn a little about copyright issues (a la the similarities of plagiarism and copyright)

It's these types of reactions

This make me glad that in Canada (I don't know the status in other countries) George Orwell's book, 1984, is in the public domain. The way things are going, this book should be required reading material, with a follow-up report, for a politician. Each and every time they are elected.

This would serve a dual-purpose. First off, they would hopefully wise up to the follies of such attempts by the government to control the freedoms of the people, and make them learn a little about copyright issues (a la the similarities of plagiarism and copyright)

Re: I'm just sick of it

Yeah, and not forgetting that a vast amount of funding came from America for the I.R.A. All with the knowledge of the American government during the '80s. Not much was done to attempt to stop it for a fair while.

The Arab Spring has made people in power around the world realise that their power stems from the people, and that these days the people can get organized through some newfangled contraption called "the interweb".

Clearly, it is unacceptable that mere plebs are allowed to rock the boat, so the interwebs has to go.

Re: Re: It's these types of reactions

Also, what we have here is a slippery slope. Take Newgrounds.com which has been targeted by clueless politicians who wanted games "banned" from one reason or another, but couldn't because it was simply an online game. Would this request finally allow the critters to force ISPs to bend over backwards and censor or ban any flash games that they find "offensive"?

wonder why the 'internet is evil' emphasis has moved from file sharing to terrorism in the UK? they have a convicted terrorist that they cant deport, (on human rights grounds from what i understand) but manage to rule that a guy that has links on a website can be extradited. i guess that shows the misplaced priorities the UK has. seems like file sharing is obviously more dangerous than terrorism!

Re:

Another to the list of buzzwords

-Terrorism
-Jobs
-Copyright
-Child pornography

Government Guidebook
Government 101 :Passing laws

-Raise an "issue", that usually gets a rise from the public
-Produce you're bill/law as the solution to these problems
-Puclic outlash at the "issue"
-Public demands a solution
-Oh but wait, you have something prepared,
-Public sighs in relief
-You pass the bill/law with the publics consent
-You now have another avenue of consented control, to do with, whatever you feel necessary
-Public are glad they brought the issue up

I happen to know know for a fact that every single terrorist on the planet breathed something called "air". Obviously this "air" is a leading cause of terrorism and must be eliminated. Let's all band together and rid the planet of this terrorist producing "air".